• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The myth of trump's falling support

The fact of the matter is, when the Democrats are inspired to come out and vote, they are unbeatable. Proof? Obama lost independents 45%-50% (1 percentage point more than Hillary who also lost independents to Trump 42%-46%), and yet won his election by five million more votes. The Democrat base, when they vote, can easily defeat the Republicans, especially when electing presidents. Problem is, they don't always vote in the numbers they should, especially in the mid-terms. Trump is an EASILY beatable candidate, and since the Dem voters seem fired up now, they should do some damage in upcoming elections, but what about after? Even if the Democrats take back control of the government, will they continue to vote in large numbers, or not show up and vote because a candidate they don't like is on the ballot? Republican voters, barring a few exceptions here and there, always come out and vote Republican, regardless of who the candidate is. Democrats don't do this.
 
TobyOne said:
He's done nothing to reduce independent votes. Sure, hes an oaf and a buffoon but at the end of the day, it won't matter. His numbers have gone down because of media attacks - but ultimately that's a plus.

Moreover, if democrats run any of the the moonbats that lead their party today, they'll be screwed. Maybe another Obama will show up but they need to be a better Obama then Obama. Putting a black man in a suit will no longer work.
Click to expand...

When Trump was inaugurated, he had 48% support among independents. Now it's down to 34%. No president in recent history has ever been re-elected with an approval rating below 50%. Reagan, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama all were re-elected with approval ratings above 50%. Bush Sr. lost his election, and his approval rating was below 50%. Now I know Trump is a unique case, however history is not on his side. Then again, the Democrats screwed up once by nominating a candidate almost as disliked as he was, so who knows? They may do it again.
 
Cardinal said:
And with any luck, he will continue to. I don't think there's another human being on earth who could so successfully concentrate the entire Democratic base into a single, grim purpose.

That said, it will be extraordinarily important not to elect candidates with the purpose of spitting back, or trump will have changed the country for the worse, and for generations. If we elect candidates with the purpose of returning the country to a course that reflects a need for compassion and decency, then these two years will just be a bad memory.

As Dave Chapelle said, "It's still a great party, we just have a bad DJ."
Click to expand...

I agree with this, though part of the vindictive side of me kind of wishes the next Democrat president makes it his or her #1 goal to wipe out everything they can from the Trump presidency. Basically render it completely irrelevant. That said, it would just be following the current path the GOP voters have chosen. Elect presidents for the sole purpose of wiping out everything their predecessor did. Not exactly how we should be electing presidents, so I hope the Democrats don't follow in that path, even if Trump and his supporters deserve it.
 
Puigb said:
The fact of the matter is, when the Democrats are inspired to come out and vote, they are unbeatable. Proof? Obama lost independents 45%-50% (1 percentage point more than Hillary who also lost independents to Trump 42%-46%), and yet won his election by five million more votes. The Democrat base, when they vote, can easily defeat the Republicans, especially when electing presidents. Problem is, they don't always vote in the numbers they should, especially in the mid-terms. Trump is an EASILY beatable candidate, and since the Dem voters seem fired up now, they should do some damage in upcoming elections, but what about after? Even if the Democrats take back control of the government, will they continue to vote in large numbers, or not show up and vote because a candidate they don't like is on the ballot? Republican voters, barring a few exceptions here and there, always come out and vote Republican, regardless of who the candidate is. Democrats don't do this.
Click to expand...

That is indeed the six million dollar question: how do you in instill a culture of civic participation before the house is on fire?

I think the fact that there is no left-wing propaganda equivalent of Fox News is a large piece of that particular puzzle, but I don't want the left wing to have its own version of Fox News, and the failure of the Air America network demonstrates that other liberals don't want one either. That said, left-wing podcasts that are more oriented toward informing and, to some degree such as Pod Save America, entertainment, are doing much better. But that doesn't mean these podcasts will persevere after the left wing base ceases to be given a reason to be angry. By contrast, Fox News feeds its audience a reason to be angry all the time because they're not afraid to make crap up out of thin air.
 
Bleah, he's constantly attacked. All presidents are but when the campaign engine gets into high gear, he'll counter that. In 2016, once he became the GOP candidate he was constantly attacked by the media. Did it matter ? No. Will he have record in 2020 ? Yes. And so far it will be good.


Puigb said:
When Trump was inaugurated, he had 48% support among independents. Now it's down to 34%. No president in recent history has ever been re-elected with an approval rating below 50%. Reagan, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama all were re-elected with approval ratings above 50%. Bush Sr. lost his election, and his approval rating was below 50%. Now I know Trump is a unique case, however history is not on his side. Then again, the Democrats screwed up once by nominating a candidate almost as disliked as he was, so who knows? They may do it again.
Click to expand...
 
I'm going to guess in the immediate aftermath of a government shutdown plus the State of the Union he gets himself in the low-to-mid 40's.
 
Cardinal said:
That is indeed the six million dollar question: how do you in instill a culture of civic participation before the house is on fire?

I think the fact that there is no left-wing propaganda equivalent of Fox News is a large piece of that particular puzzle, but I don't want the left wing to have its own version of Fox News, and the failure of the Air America network demonstrates that other liberals don't want one either. That said, left-wing podcasts that are more oriented toward informing and, to some degree such as Pod Save America, entertainment, are doing much better. But that doesn't mean these podcasts will persevere after the left wing base ceases to be given a reason to be angry. By contrast, Fox News feeds its audience a reason to be angry all the time because they're not afraid to make crap up out of thin air.
Click to expand...

Oh, absolutely. Fox News and their propaganda is a large reason why Donald Trump, the lead birther, is president. They created the monster (the Republican base) that voted for Donald Trump in the millions. Ironically, Fox News was very anti Trump in the beginning, as they wanted the establishment candidate first choice (Jeb Bush) to win the nomination. When it became inevitable that Trump was going to be the GOP nominee, Fox News had to change their tune, or risk losing some of their viewers.
 
Polls are not only FAEK NOOZ - they were really wrong in 2016. This fact is inescapable. Your time in a Trump concentration camp will be long and painful.



Kobie said:
The polls disagree with you. Too bad, so sad. Keep spewing your bull**** and maybe some idiot will listen.

Oh, my bad. Polls! FAEK NOOZ! I forget, we have to keep things simple for simpletons.
Click to expand...
 
TobyOne said:
Bleah, he's constantly attacked. All presidents are but when the campaign engine gets into high gear, he'll counter that. In 2016, once he became the GOP candidate he was constantly attacked by the media. Did it matter ? No. Will he have record in 2020 ? Yes. And so far it will be good.
Click to expand...

Keep hope alive then. History is not on his side, though again, I'll admit the Democrats could potentially screw up.
 
Puigb said:
I agree with this, though part of the vindictive side of me kind of wishes the next Democrat president makes it his or her #1 goal to wipe out everything they can from the Trump presidency. Basically render it completely irrelevant. That said, it would just be following the current path the GOP voters have chosen. Elect presidents for the sole purpose of wiping out everything their predecessor did. Not exactly how we should be electing presidents, so I hope the Democrats don't follow in that path, even if Trump and his supporters deserve it.
Click to expand...

I want to catapult trump and all his supporters into the sun, but if I follow a course toward making a realistic version of that possible, I will have joined them in destroying this country. If we truly believe that we want this country to be better, we have to be better.

That certainly doesn't mean we can't inflict every legal instrument of torture on trump and his administration that's available to us, though. You shouldn't give in to your dark side, exactly, but you also have to know when giving in to it is kind of okay, too.
 
TobyOne said:
Polls are not only FAEK NOOZ - they were really wrong in 2016. This fact is inescapable. Your time in a Trump concentration camp will be long and painful.
Click to expand...

Actually, they weren't. I would suggest reading up on what polls actually do, what they actually told us, what their actual purpose is, and how you have no idea what a "fact" is.
 
Fiddytree said:
I'm going to guess in the immediate aftermath of a government shutdown plus the State of the Union he gets himself in the low-to-mid 40's.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, I can't deny that possibility. And on the night of the State of the Union it's entirely possible that "this is the night Trump became President."

And the day after, he will chuck a baby at a dog that's chasing him in order to save himself, on live camera. Or a NYTimes article will come out revealing that he was the captain of a slaving ship. Because that's what always happens.
 
Cardinal said:
Yeah, well, I can't deny that possibility. And on the night of the State of the Union it's entirely possible that "this is the night Trump became President."
Click to expand...

That may continue to have implications in the Senate races, babies and dogs, notwithstanding.
 
Cardinal said:
I want to catapult trump and all his supporters into the sun, but if I follow a course toward making a realistic version of that possible, I will have joined them in destroying this country. If we truly believe that we want this country to be better, we have to be better.

That certainly doesn't mean we can't inflict every legal instrument of torture on trump and his administration that's available to us, though. You shouldn't give in to your dark side, exactly, but you also have to know when giving in to it is kind of okay, too.
Click to expand...

This is one of the finest short posts I've seen on this forum. Especially the first paragraph.

Even if we do succeed in taking back our government from these right-wing fanatics known as Republicans, we absolutely cannot respond to evil with evil. Otherwise we would become one tyranny replacing another.
 
Cardinal said:
~snipped because your post is too damned long :doh~

But if Democrats retake just one house of Congress, the Republican legislative agenda will come to a crashing end. And not only that, Democrats will get power of the subpoena, and at that point trump’s life will turn into complete and utter hell. You won’t get the pleasure of seeing him impeached, but watching him become subject to a brutal and ongoing public investigation with real teeth will be enormously fulfilling just the same.
Click to expand...

I guess Mueller's teeth just aren't up to the task, eh?
 
Cardinal said:
Oh Jesus, I completely forgot about those ****ing people. Sanders voters who went over to trump clearly never went to Bernie's "on the issues" page. They almost certainly just assumed he was some crazy anarchist out to break the system, and if they couldn't have him then trump would do.
Click to expand...

I think the 12% of Sanders to Trump voters were just as much anti establishment, business as usual as the Trump voters. But from the opposite side of the political spectrum. Then you had another 12% of Sanders voters who opted for third party candidates. Those were probably just angry as all get out at Clinton and the DNC rigging of the primaries, but wouldn't vote for Trump because they hated him too. Then there were the no shows. Sanders voters who stayed home which my grand daughter who is attending Kennasaw State was one of them. She called Clinton "Wall Street Hillary" along with being mad at what she thought was the DNC robbing Sanders of the nomination. She also viewed Trump as a Racist and wouldn't vote for either Clinton or Trump.

I tried to talk her into voting third party to register her anger at both candidates, but she wouldn't have it. She stayed home. I think the effect of the rigging of the Democratic Primaries for Sanders supporters/voters has gone way under reported as it is probably one of the main causes, one of the biggest reasons Hillary lost.

24% of that chunk of voters is a huge number, Sanders to Trump or voting third party for Hillary to lose not counting probably another high number who just stayed home and didn't bother to vote. This gets way over looked in my opinion.
 
I hope he doesn't resign either. I think and it's purely my thought nothing to back it up.
If and that's a big if the democrats take the house in a real wave and the Senate is 50/50 we will see a different Trump mind you not personally, he'll still watch fox and tweet dumb **** but the policy agenda will change.
 
Fiddytree said:
That may continue to have implications in the Senate races, babies and dogs, notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

1)Trump has gone on the record multiple times calling for a shutdown.
2)Republicans control both houses of Congress
3)Republicans and Democrats created a bipartisan bill that trump rejected.
4)Republicans could have reauthorized CHIP at any time and refused to, only now using it as a bargaining chip
5)DACA is an inherently humanitarian concept that has the sympathy of the overwhelming majority of the public
6)Republicans burned their credibility by repeatedly trying to take away millions of people's health insurance and passing a bill the majority of the public sees as benefiting the rich
7)Trump burned his credibility...period.

I'm not saying this won't fall on the Democrats' heads, but I don't think this is as cut and dried as you're assuming.
 
Mycroft said:
I guess Mueller's teeth just aren't up to the task, eh?
Click to expand...

Although the scope of Mueller's investigation is greater than most trump supporters understand, it does have its limits. It's unlikely his investigation will touch on emoluments violations, and if he uncovers crimes that are outside the scope of the investigation then he can't report on those crimes. Which is moot because unlike a Congressional committee he doesn't have the legal freedom to do a tell-all to the public anyway.

A Congressional committee can open up literally any avenue of investigation they please and they're allowed to make those findings public at their own discretion. That's why the gold standard for investigating trump is a simultaneous Special Counselor and Congressional investigation. As it stands, the latter has tasked itself with playing defense for trump, so they have no credibility, especially seeing as they've decided to simply ignore flagrant violations of the Emoluments Clause altogether. A Democratic-majority house of Congress won't do that.
 
Phys251 said:
This is one of the finest short posts I've seen on this forum. Especially the first paragraph.
Click to expand...

Eh, it could have done without the second paragraph, to be sure. But thanks.
 
Cardinal said:
Although the scope of Mueller's investigation is greater than most trump supporters understand, it does have its limits. It's unlikely his investigation will touch on emoluments violations, and if he uncovers crimes that are outside the scope of the investigation then he can't report on those crimes. Which is moot because unlike a Congressional committee he doesn't have the legal freedom to do a tell-all to the public anyway.

A Congressional committee can open up literally any avenue of investigation they please and they're allowed to make those findings public at their own discretion. That's why the gold standard for investigating trump is a simultaneous Special Counselor and Congressional investigation. As it stands, the latter has tasked itself with playing defense for trump, so they have no credibility, especially seeing as they've decided to simply ignore flagrant violations of the Emoluments Clause altogether. A Democratic-majority house of Congress won't do that.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry the witch hunt isn't going as well as you'd like.
 
Mycroft said:
I'm sorry the witch hunt isn't going as well as you'd like.
Click to expand...

Now that you understand the limitations of Mueller's investigation, do you feel more comfortable over this "witch hunt"?
 
Cardinal said:
1)Trump has gone on the record multiple times calling for a shutdown.
2)Republicans control both houses of Congress
3)Republicans and Democrats created a bipartisan bill that trump rejected.
4)Republicans could have reauthorized CHIP at any time and refused to, only now using it as a bargaining chip
5)DACA is an inherently humanitarian concept that has the sympathy of the overwhelming majority of the public
6)Republicans burned their credibility by repeatedly trying to take away millions of people's health insurance and passing a bill the majority of the public sees as benefiting the rich
7)Trump burned his credibility...period.

I'm not saying this won't fall on the Democrats' heads, but I don't think this is as cut and dried as you're assuming.
Click to expand...

I’m saying for Democrats in red states, this is not nearly as positive as national Democrats are making it sound.

Polling continues to show that the risk is quite high that it may backfire for vulnerable Democrats.

And, I don’t know about you, but given that Democrats are not guaranteed to take the House and they are weakest in the Senate this go around, I’d rather they not undercut themselves for a premature stunt.

Republicans took a 10 point hit for many many months in 2013. In the end they came out okay, but when you’re risking your seat in strong enemy territory, you don’t look at that past experience lightly. If they see CHIP being offered, even if at the discount rate of 6 rather than 10 years, it looks good. The government stays open. You’re working “with the President,” which I’m sorry, comes off good in a state with 50+% approval for the President.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
I’m saying for Democrats in red states, this is not nearly as positive as national Democrats are making it sound.

Polling continues to show that the risk is quite high that it may backfire for vulnerable Democrats.

And, I don’t know about you, but given that Democrats are not guaranteed to take the House and they are weakest in the Senate this go around, I’d rather they not undercut themselves for a premature stunt.

Republicans took a 10 point hit for many many months in 2013. In the end they came out okay, but when you’re risking your seat in strong enemy territory, you don’t look at that past experience lightly. If they see CHIP being offered, even if at the discount rate of 6 rather than 10 years, it looks good. The government stays open. You’re working “with the President,” which I’m sorry, comes off good in a state with 50+% approval for the President.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

Yes, you've told me that before and I accept that as a legitimate concern. What I have to consider is the increased vulnerability of Democrats in those red states versus the corrosive and demoralizing impact of Democrats not standing up for basic humanitarian principles across the entire Democratic base.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom